ePub 版

requested to forthwith convene the Legislature, in order to take such steps as the rights, interests and honor of this State and of the whole South shall demand.

Resolved, That the Senate do agree to the report.

Ordered, That it be sent the House of Representatives for concur


By order.


In the House of Representatives, December 19, 1849:
Resolved, That the House do concur in the report.
Ordered, That it be returned to the Senate.
By order.

T. W. GLOVER, C. H. R.

In the House of Representatives, December 18, 1849: The Committee on Federal Relations, to whom was referred so much of the Govornor's message as relates to the recommendation to the Southern States, by a convention of the people of Mississippi, to send delegates to meet at Nashville to consult in common upon common rights, with a view to unity of action.

And, also, so much of the message as relates to the convening of the Legislature upon the Wilmot proviso, or any kindred measure, becoming a law of Congress, report that the people of this State entertain an ardent desire and fixed determination to resist the lawless and unjust encroachments of Congress on the rights of the South, and have pledged themselves, through their legislatures, to co-operate with the other Southern States in opposition to all such measures. They, therefore, concur with his Excellency in the belief that South Carolina hails with delight the proffer by the people of Mississippi of meeting, by delegates, in common counsels, at Nashville, and will heartily and promptly send delegates there to represent them; that they concur, also, with his Excellency in the propriety of calling together the Legislature should any such contingency occur, as is alluded to by his Excellency, and therefore recommend the adoption of the following resolutions:

Resolved, That should the Wilmot proviso, or any kindred measure, become a law of Congress, the Governor is hereby earnestly requested to call together the Legislature, should it not be in session at the time of the passage of such law.

Resolved, That the House do agree to the report.
Ordered, That it be sent to the Senate for concurrence.
By order.

In Senate, December 19, 1849:

T. W. GLOVER, C. H. R.

Resolved, That the Senate do concur in the report.

Ordered, That it be returned to the House of Representatives.

By order.


It is important to observe how carefully the Senate insist upon "the necessity, on the part of the Southern people, of a united action against the encroachments of the North," and declare this State to be prepared "promptly to take such steps as the other States of the South shall recommend." With equal care the House of Representatives declares that "the people of this State have pledged themselves, through their legislatures, to co-operate with the other Southern States in opposition to all such measures."

Here, then, are all the pledges of South Carolina. They are distinct and definite for co-operation with our sister States of the South. Not one word is there of separate State action or secession.

The proceedings of the session of 1850 strengthen this view of the subject. At this session no resolutions were adopted, but several leading measures distinctly evince the position of the State. The first of these measures was the act calling a convention and Southern Congress. The preamble to this act, as well as its provisions, manifestly speak the views of the Legislature.

The act is entitled, an act to provide for the appointment of Deputies to a Southern Congress, and to call a Convention of the people of this State; and here is its preamble:

"Whereas, the convention of the slave-holding States, lately assembled at Nashville, have recommended to the said States to meet in Congress or Convention, to be held at such time and place as the States desiring to be represented may designate, to be composed of double the number of their Senators and Representatives in the Congress of the United States, entrusted with full power and authority to deliberate with the view and intention of arresting further aggressions, and, if possible, of restoring the constitutional rights of the South; and, if not, to recommend due provision for their future safety and independence." And what is the declared object of this convention? By the terms of the act itself, it is assembled "for the purpose, in the first place, of taking into consideration the proceedings and recommendations of a Congress of the slave-holding States, if the same shall meet and be held; and for the further purpose of taking into consideration the general welfare of this State, in view of her relations to the laws and government of the United States, and, thereupon, to take care that the Commonwealth of South Carolina shall suffer no detriment."

Is it in the power of human ingenuity, with these proceedings open before you, to persuade you now that South Carolina is pledged to secession? Nay, is it not most clear that she is pledged exactly to the reverse-to concert and union with her sister States?

If there were any doubt remaining, it would be dispelled by the fact that when the Legislature elected, at the last session, the delegates who were to represent the State at large in this Southern Congress, they

elected R. W. Barnwell, Langdon Cheves, Wade Hampton, and John P. Richardson, all of whom, at the time, were supposed to be opposed to separate secession, and three of whom still maintain the same opinions.

While we have before us these same records of the action and pledges of our State, let us examine another of the statements by which the secession party have misled the people. Those who oppose secession are continually traduced as insincere in their professions of resistance; the people are told everywhere that the Co-operation party are mere timeservers, disguised submissionists, and that Secessionists alone are the real active movers of resistance. Let us test the professions of both parties by their practice, and we shall arrive at more just conclusions. At the last session of the Legislature three practical measures were brought forward which were deemed necessary to resistance in any form. The first of these was the raising of money by increase of the taxes; the second, the formation of a board for judiciously expending the money; and, the third, the building of steam-packets for creating a direct trade with Europe, and providing the State with armed steamers to assist in defending her coast.

[ocr errors]

You are, of course, prepared to expect that these measures were introduced and urged by the secession leaders; what will be your surprise to learn that they were all introduced by co-operation men, and two of them were actually opposed by several of the most prominent secession men; and if this opposition had been successful, the third would have failed, because it depended upon one of the others.

The increase of taxes was proposed by myself, and in and out of the House it was urged as incumbent on South Carolina, where alone the resistance party had possession of the government, to provide arms and munitions of war, not only for herself, but for the confederates which we expected soon to have from the South. It had been urged by the Union party in several of our sister States that in case of conflict with the general government, there was not powder enough in the whole South to supply a single engagement. Nay, some of you may remember that even in South Carolina the Governor had replied to a company at Walterborough that he was unable to supply them with arms. To meet these exigencies, to encourage our friends in the South, and to exhibit to our enemies at the North a spirit of determination which could not be put down, we urged an increase of the taxes. Let the record speak what followed. I have copied the following from the Journal (page 221):

"Mr. Harrison moved to reduce the tax on lands from fifty-three to twenty-five cents. Mr. Memminger moved to lay the amendment on the table-yeas 74, nays 38. Among the 'nays are the following namesMessrs. Abney, Easley, Evins, Harrison, Hutson, Ingram, Lyles, Moorman," etc. Those acquainted with the names will recognize among the nays the active legislative leaders of the secession party.

You will see still further into these matters by examining the legis lative action upon another practical measure of the last session. This was the bill for aiding in establishing a direct trade by steam-packets with Europe, in which was a clause giving the aid of the State to this enterprise on condition that the steamers should be so built as to be available to the State for war purposes, and should be sold to the State in case they were required. This measure was introduced by Colonel Chesnut, of Camden, who is now the Co-operation candidate for the Southern Congress from the Third Congressional District. It was reported by the committee of which I have the honor to be chairman; and when it came before the House the following proceedings took place.

House Journal, p. 163: "B. F. Perry moved to strike out the nineteenth clause and those following (which granted the aid of the State and required the steamers to be so constructed as to be made available for war purposes). Yeas 41, nays 60. Among the yeas are the following -Messrs. Abney, Hutson, Keitt, Moorman, Sullivan,” etc.

Now when it is considered that these were the practical measures which clearly exhibited to all the world our determination to provide for our defense, and that the establishment of a direct trade with Europe by steamers was in every aspect an effective measure of resistance, it is not surprising that Mr. Perry, of Greenville, should have opposed it, but to find the secession leaders joining with him to oppose the first nucleus of maritime defense, the first beginnings of practical resistance, will doubtless surprise you as much as it did us.'

I have thus laid before you, fellow-citizens, the highest evidence possible; and if any one shall again speak to you of the pledges of the State, or of the submissive temper of the Co-operation men, you can reply that the State is indeed pledged, but that the pledge is to co-operation and against separate action; and as to the comparison between the active zeal of the two parties, you can safely appeal to the acts of those who represent your views; the record will speak for them, and will

1 NOTE.-The other practical measure, appointing a Board of Ordnance, was introduced by Mr. Torre, of Charleston, one of the firmest advocates of co-operation, and opposed to secession. The yeas and nays not appearing on this measure in the Journal, I made no note of it, and it thus escaped my attention in my speech. I also omitted to notice that I had myself submitted to the House the following resolutions to indicate my view of the course to be pursued by the State:

"In the House of Representatives, December 10, 1850, Mr. Memminger submitted the following resolutions:

"1. Resolved, That the proposal of the Nashville Convention that the slave-holding States shall meet in a Southern Congress, is accepted by South Carolina, and this General Assembly will forthwith provide for the appointment of deputies to the same.

"2. Resolved, That two hundred thousand dollars be appropriated for the purpose of arming and defending the State.

"3. Resolved, That a police system be established for protecting our people, bond and free, from the evil designs of Northern emissaries and abolitionists.”

relieve you from the necessity of being heralds of your own achieve


While engaged in this task of clearing away cobwebs, allow me to ask your attention for a moment to a matter personal to myself. I am sorry to detain you upon so humble a subject, while matters of so much more moment await our consideration; but as the opposite party have thought it worthy of their attention, it becomes needful to set it right. I observe that the Secession party have done me the honor to publish my speech delivered at Pendleton last fall, as one of their tracts, and thereby inferentially to claim my sanction to their measures. I presume this honor to have been procured by the last short paragraph of the speech, in which it is declared that if all the South shall refuse to unite with us, and we be left to choose between submission and resistance, I, for one, would prefer to secede from the Union.

Let it be borne in mind that I was speaking of the action of States in whose history years are but as days to individuals-that the whole drift of the speech is to commend resistance, and to show that a Southern Confederacy is the true and practicable and desirable mode. The example of the revolution is then held up for imitation, in which, be it remembered, that more than ten years were consumed in procuring concert of action; and then it is declared that if such concert cannot be had, I would prefer martyrdom to self-destruction. By what reasonable interpretation could this justify an abandonment of the effort at co-operation in a single year, and that too when the Secessionists have themselves prevented the steps necessary to procure it.

You yourselves know, fellow-citizens, that in a speech delivered before you upon hearing of the death of Mr. Calhoun, I urged you to accept the legacy which he had left us of resistance according to his views, and strongly urged upon you the example and measures of the American Revolution. If in my speech at Pendleton I was unguarded in not including the element of time, it was because I spoke as many of our friends, the Secessionists, still do, under the impulse of deep-felt wrongs. I was urging on the mountain population to resist injustice, the pressure of which was less realized where few slaves existed; and under these feelings words were not carefully weighed, nor possible misconstructions guarded against. But now that the matter is under sober consideration, now that I am told what use is made of the language, I unhesitatingly declare that be the language what it may, my deliberate judgment is against the separate secession of South Carolina. I have an abiding confidence that the slave-holding States will co-operate with each other, and that a union of the South will be formed in spite of every obstacle; and these views I urged upon the last Legislature when I opposed the call of a convention. I have no sympathy with that consistency which adheres to an opinion merely because it has been once expressed; the only consistency which I aim at, is that of right.

« 上一頁繼續 »